A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.

cartervj wrote:read that every taxpayer is on the hook for 1.1 million in government funded liabilities

The numbers are huge, but I'm dubious of the accounting. I don't think they are doing the present value of those liabilities, but simply adding up the projected spending over some long period of time.

The current federal spending over the next 40 years is around 2 million per taxpayer. The 1.1 million number being about half of that. You would never do that. It is flawed, just like the stupid Obamacare cost being the first 10 years and then disregarding the explosion in costs outside of that. You have to account for cost and revenue until the end of time to see if it is sustainable. And if as Indaswamp likes to talk about the difference in growth rates, if they exist, you have a problem if there is not a self correction mechanism.

It's complicated to understand if there is or is not a problem and much of it is based on how good your assumptions are. And what they assumed is the second part that is never clear. You have to run a range of them and there is no way on earth they are correct to the level that they can tell the difference between 1.1 and 1.2 or probably even 2.2. However, if you want to convince people that you know what you are doing, you don't say that it is about one million, you say it is 1.148693442354452622345 million. OK, you just say 1.1 so you don't look silly.

The numbers are huge and finding the money is not possible, but I just can't understand what they did in most cases. I didn't look at this particular report.

The problem with these things is that it is just so easy to confuse most people and then they fall back to believing what they want to be true and the hucksters win like they did in Detroit.

A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.

remember-what you pay for coverage is considered a TAX by the supreme Court! They can pull your coverage at any time and you don't get SQUAT! It's not a premium with fiduciary responsibilities behind it. It's not a contract bound by law. IT IS A TAX!

How many liberals heads did this fact fly over???

The Cajun 7 Course Meal; 1 lb. of boudin and a six pack of Abita beer.

Now, if you had one of these substandard plans before the Affordable Care Act became law, and you really like that plan, you were able to keep it. That's what I said when I was running for office. That was part of the promise we made. But ever since the law was passed, if insurers decided to downgrade or cancel the substandard plans, what we said under the law is that you have got to replace them with quality, comprehensive coverage because that, too, was a central premise of the Affordable Care Act from the very beginning. So if you're getting one of these letters [canceling your insurance policy], just shop around in the new marketplace. That's what it's for...

So, he is only looking out for the idiots who did not realize they had a substandard plan at a substandard price. Just understand that The One knows what is best for you. What a jackass. And I find it interesting when he is backing away for his lies that he uses the term "we" to avoid responsibilty for his direct actions. Now, that is a leader for you.

And if you lose your insurance because the new rules make the plan you had and liked obsolete or too expensive, just shop around. That is what he promised all along. Not what you heard him say dozens of times.

We will hear the words "substandard plans and downgraded plans" repeated endlessly now as I guess that is the new talking point for the Hacks and Useful Idiots.

SpinnerMan wrote:...The poor simply don't have anything so they can't bear the financial burden. Granted they bear the burden of crime, failed education, and other things, and do bear a heavy burden in terms of quality of life....

Please, Spinner, use a sarcmark. Otherwise this is laughable. They BEAR THE BURDEN of crime and failed education?!?!? Now I let the fact that liberals think that homosexuality is something one was born with go. I disagree 100%, but I let it go. This? This is different. Have you never heard of a little self-help? This government has taken away the drive to work, because SO much is given out, handed out, unnecessarily to those who don't need it/deserve it. I often find myself believing that the people who need the money the most often don't receive it, and some people who deserve the money the least somehow always get it.What irks me the most is that some people who aren't disabled, nor have any real sort of disability whatsoever will receive disability, some people purposefully will not seek work just to draw unemployment, and yet Mr. Obama does things like cutting all of the funding promised to the community of West, TX (the site of the fertilizer plant explosion last spring) after he personally addressed the community at Baylor University and promised them his full support and financial aid. They needed the support, and they now won't get any; yet millions of people will continue to abuse the system on a daily basis, and we'll do nothing to stop them. Please don't misinterpret this as me saying that government help to the poor is unnecessary. That is not my belief, nor is it what I was intending to say.